You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
Twitter Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Where Have All the Rodents Gone? The Effects of Attrition in Experimental Research on Cancer and Stroke
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLoS Biology, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002331 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Constance Holman, Sophie K. Piper, Ulrike Grittner, Andreas Antonios Diamantaras, Jonathan Kimmelman, Bob Siegerink, Ulrich Dirnagl |
| Abstract |
Given small sample sizes, loss of animals in preclinical experiments can dramatically alter results. However, effects of attrition on distortion of results are unknown. We used a simulation study to analyze the effects of random and biased attrition. As expected, random loss of samples decreased statistical power, but biased removal, including that of outliers, dramatically increased probability of false positive results. Next, we performed a meta-analysis of animal reporting and attrition in stroke and cancer. Most papers did not adequately report attrition, and extrapolating from the results of the simulation data, we suggest that their effect sizes were likely overestimated. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 94 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 15 | 16% |
| United States | 13 | 14% |
| Australia | 8 | 9% |
| Germany | 7 | 7% |
| Spain | 3 | 3% |
| Italy | 2 | 2% |
| Colombia | 2 | 2% |
| Ghana | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Unknown | 36 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 62 | 66% |
| Scientists | 21 | 22% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 5 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 4 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Slovenia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 122 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 35 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 9% |
| Professor | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 24 | 18% |
| Unknown | 18 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 29 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 16% |
| Neuroscience | 15 | 11% |
| Psychology | 10 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 24 | 18% |
| Unknown | 27 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 285. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 October 2021.
All research outputs
#115,944
of 24,319,828 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Biology
#248
of 7,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,958
of 402,363 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Biology
#2
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,319,828 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,714 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 51.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 402,363 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.